Spare tire mounting on Vegas

[Oneilkeys]

Originally Posted by Chance

At present in US, yes; unless you go custom. Hence why I wished for more options.

Duals are common because it's cheaper, but many motorhomes are built with single rear wheels. In Europe where Class As are smaller and lighter it's very common. In the US a few were available for years until RVs were made much heavier, and custom off-road motorhomes still use them.

The main size limitation is how much weight the government allows per axle with single tires. But that's in the 20,000 pound range, so not much of a limit for most of us. It can be done but Americans apparently feel safer with DRW.

Regarding size limitations, I'd guess this 4-wheeler has much higher GVWR than an Axis.

You're right, of course. I meant buying in the U.S.. We parked in line with one of these behemoths getting on the Alaska ferry from Whittier to Valdez and I want one! A German couple had shipped it over on a ship and spent two months in Alaska traveling the back country. My wife calls them the "garbage truck" RVs. The one we saw had the curved back of a garbage truck. Got a quick tour of the inside and it was beautifully done, albeit with few windows. It would be wonderful in Akaska and northwestern Canada.

[Metalman]

I like the thought of having a smaller RV; one that can be easily used as a mode of transportation when traveling, one that doesn't burn as much fuel as most class As and Cs, and one that drives like a van. Most Americans arelarger than most Europeans (not to mention Asians) so those class B RVs just don't work for many of us. There is no way that I could function in any that I've seen, since I am 6'-4" in height.

The RV in the above photo looks quite strongly built and possibly is large enough to accommodate big people, but with what looks like four-wheel drive, and with those huge mud-sucking tires, I suspect that it rides like a tank, sounds like a tank, has to be fed like a tank, and probably isn't very stable at speeds of over 45 mph.

I don't have a problem with dual rear wheels because in addition to providing more carrying capacity in the rear, they also provide a wider stance and therefore more stability than most vehicles with only four wheels.

[EA37TS]

If you want off-road and small get a Turtle. You can even pick the chassis.

Turtle Model 2014 | Global Expedition Vehicles

[JamieGeek]

Or you could just roll your own:
Building a Unimog Truck Camper Rig

[Chance]

Originally Posted by Metalman

I like the thought of having a smaller RV; one that can be easily used as a mode of transportation when traveling, one that doesn't burn as much fuel as most class As and Cs, and one that drives like a van. Most Americans arelarger than most Europeans (not to mention Asians) so those class B RVs just don't work for many of us. There is no way that I could function in any that I've seen, since I am 6'-4" in height.

The RV in the above photo looks quite strongly built and possibly is large enough to accommodate big people, but with what looks like four-wheel drive, and with those huge mud-sucking tires, I suspect that it rides like a tank, sounds like a tank, has to be fed like a tank, and probably isn't very stable at speeds of over 45 mph.

I don't have a problem with dual rear wheels because in addition to providing more carrying capacity in the rear, they also provide a wider stance and therefore more stability than most vehicles with only four wheels.

A small Class A that drives like a large van would be ideal for us, particularly if it got good fuel economy and could be taken into city traffic easily -- hence my interest in Axis. Germans, who I believe are as large as Americans for the most part, make many compact Class As that are somewhat similar in size. My wife and I aren't that large so we don't need as much elbow room inside a motorhome.

Back on topic: Many of these compact fuel-efficient motorhome offerings are based on 4 equal size wheel/tires which I personally think is best for many motorhomes of all sizes. Duallies are for trucks so that roughly 2/3 or more of weight is over driven wheels so that they can work in various terrain. Most motorhomes, like cars, stay on improved roads so having most weight over rear axle seems unnecessary.

US manufacturers could build motorhomes like this, even larger, with 4 wheels if they wanted. My guess is there isn't much of a market yet.

[Chance]

I saw this picture and it reminded me of this thread. It also reminded me of my compact Class C which had the spare off the back wall. For Axis/Vegas without a rear wall slide, this type of installation "may" work for those who can't handle weight of spare under the motorhome, or just don't want to crawl underneath it. Before considering this type of installation I'd check with Thor regarding weight-carrying capacity of rear wall, as well as placement of any in-wall reinforcements.

[DocMike]

Nice and simple. Even if you had to reinforce the mounting bolts on the inside of the rear storage bay (say with a 2ft by 2ft bonded mounted panel) it should not be much of a big deal nor take up much space.


Thanks for the picture and info.

[nick104]

Has anyone actually measured the width of the 16 inch rims to see if the front and rear ( dual rims ) are the same size ? That seems pretty basis but a critical factor if you are going to carry only one spare tire and plan to use it on both the front and rear ( dually ) axil. I gained complete respect for tires last summer on a 6000 mile round trip to Seattle, WA from TN and again on a trip to the FL Keys. I had my first ever BLOW-OUTS. Michelin radial tires with plenty of tread, hot summer day in Montana, fully loaded E-350 class B Pleasure-way Van going about 70 mph on the Interstate HWY on Saturday afternoon about 3:30 PM. Rapid decompression, tread separation, wheel well damage, and sewer hose compartment damage. I safely made a good stop and got well off to the side of the road. Did I mention that the tires were 7 years old with no cracks or damage and I'm sure I didn't run over anything. After I had Good Sam road service come out and put the spare tire on ( 12 years old and never on the ground ) we limped to Billings Montana at 50 mph and got a motel room to clean up and calm down. Time from blow-out to motel was about 2 hours. Thank you Good Sam roadside service. My first call ever to them in 12 years with that van. Had the van weighed the next day and it was right at the maximum gross weight, 9400 pound. Moral : Don't try to get too many years out of your tires that look new and have lots of tread. Unfortunately I had another blow-out on the other rear tire 6 months later headed to the keys south of Miami. Those rear tires carried 80 psi ( the max) and most of the weight of the van. That did it. I bought 4 new tires and used the one I bought in Montana as my spare and watch my tires and their pressures very carefully now. The front tires carried 55 psi and the rear tires 80 psi. Take care of your tires and they will take care of you !!

[Metalman]

Automobile tires are much more forgiving than RV tires, due to the lack of weight on automobiles and light trucks. On our maiden trip with a Class A, diesel pusher with only 17K miles, we had a left front Michelin blow out. The tires had plenty of tread and were only about four years old, but we didn't know if they PO had run them severely under pressure and damaged them. So we replaced the six tires and bought a spare wheel and tire. We bought Goodyears, the same type that is on our 2014 Windsport, but in the 22.5 inch size and they had a higher load rating that the Michelins. End of problems.

To check the rim size on your RV there might be a tag on the wall to the left of the driver that shows the size of the wheel both front and rear rims. They are the same size on our coach. I suspect yours are too.

[nick104]

Originally Posted by JamieGeek

Doesn't sound ridiculous to me: The front wheels aren't meant to be mounted on dually's thus they had to remove the tire and remount it on one of the dually wheels and vice versa.

I suspect that the width of the rims on my 2016 Axis 24.1 dually wheels may be a bit narrower than the front rims . I read that it is critical that the spacing between the dually wheels be correct so that the rear dually wheels can have enough sidewall flex and not rub against each other. I sure hope they are the same width as the front rims. Otherwise I might have to carry two different size spare tires. That would be ridicules but I would not be surprised because of the posts that state the front tires are not rotated to the rear and vice versa. Nick

[Marine By Choice]

My 2016 Vegas 24.1 has the same size rims on all wheels

[DocMike]

My 2016 Vegas 24.1 (E350 Chassis) has 6 rims on the ground and all the same size so I purchased a 7th rim (Steel Wheel Rim 16X6) and a tire (Michelin LT225 to match the other 6) for the spare. Mounted on a Curt sparetire mount (#31006) in the towing receiver. I pick up the mounted tire later this week and will post a picture once completed.

There is another thread about this on this site.

Doc

[Metalman]

DocMike night be referring to a thread I started because I was told by the service manager at Lazy Days that the front and rear rims were a different size on my 2015 Windsport. After looking at the chassis specs. and then seeing the info. posted on the sidewall of the RV, I found that not to be true. So apparently there is some confusion about rim size.

[blw2]

Originally Posted by nick104

Has anyone actually measured the width of the 16 inch rims to see if the front and rear ( dual rims ) are the same size ? That seems pretty basis but a critical factor if you are going to carry only one spare tire and plan to use it on both the front and rear ( dually ) axil. I gained complete respect for tires last summer on a 6000 mile round trip to Seattle, WA from TN and again on a trip to the FL Keys. I had my first ever BLOW-OUTS. Michelin radial tires with plenty of tread, hot summer day in Montana, fully loaded E-350 class B Pleasure-way Van going about 70 mph on the Interstate HWY on Saturday afternoon about 3:30 PM. Rapid decompression, tread separation, wheel well damage, and sewer hose compartment damage. I safely made a good stop and got well off to the side of the road. Did I mention that the tires were 7 years old with no cracks or damage and I'm sure I didn't run over anything. After I had Good Sam road service come out and put the spare tire on ( 12 years old and never on the ground ) we limped to Billings Montana at 50 mph and got a motel room to clean up and calm down. Time from blow-out to motel was about 2 hours. Thank you Good Sam roadside service. My first call ever to them in 12 years with that van. Had the van weighed the next day and it was right at the maximum gross weight, 9400 pound. Moral : Don't try to get too many years out of your tires that look new and have lots of tread. Unfortunately I had another blow-out on the other rear tire 6 months later headed to the keys south of Miami. Those rear tires carried 80 psi ( the max) and most of the weight of the van. That did it. I bought 4 new tires and used the one I bought in Montana as my spare and watch my tires and their pressures very carefully now. The front tires carried 55 psi and the rear tires 80 psi. Take care of your tires and they will take care of you !!

I can't imagine that they would mismatch like that on anything, even up to the class 8. Maybe for some specialty heavy equipment for some reason, but not for a truck. Why would they even bother to put the lug surface so far outboard? It would be easier, cheaper, and probably stronger to use a more standard wheel with lugs along the centerline of the tire instead of outboard.
And if for some reason they did need to mismatch, I can't imagine taht they would in such a way so that it's impossible to tell the difference. They certainly must be the way they are so that they can be rotated and intermixed universally on the vehicle.

Re your blowout experiences
Was the 55psig/80psig taht you were running based on the actual measured weights of the corners, or the axles?
Were you running a TPMS at the time?
I only ask because in all the research I have done these are two of the significant variables that contribute to blowouts. It seems that you were being mindful of these things, but how can you be sure that a leak didn't develop some time before the blowouts.... which as I understand it is how a blowout typically progresses.

[mcr1010]

The rims on my Vegas are the same all around. Just had my wheels balanced and rotated in Nov. I would guess the E450 chassis is the same.

[Chance]

Originally Posted by mcr1010

The rims on my Vegas are the same all around. Just had my wheels balanced and rotated in Nov. I would guess the E450 chassis is the same.

Ford specs not only show E-450 to use the same size tires and wheels, but also the same as the E-350's. On DRW models, that is.

[Chance]

Originally Posted by DocMike

Nice and simple. Even if you had to reinforce the mounting bolts on the inside of the rear storage bay (say with a 2ft by 2ft bonded mounted panel) it should not be much of a big deal nor take up much space.


Thanks for the picture and info.

I'm not sure how simple it may be, but I'm interested in what may be involved from a structural standpoint. Some CruiseAmerica motorhomes have spares mounted off back wall, and I believe at least some of those are built by Thor for CA. Next time I'm at CA I'm going to take a look to see how it was done.

My Coachmen was that way too, as were some of the CA rentals I've used in past. But I can't remember how tire carrier was bolted to wall.

A 75-pound tire is a lot of weight, so I'm also wondering if Thor added steel inside wall just for the tire carrier. In this particular model I'd bet there is a vertical steel tube just to left of window, so carrier probably bolts over that area of wall.

[blw2]

some folks have had luck getting the frame diagram from Thor. I don't think it's a dimensional drawing, but at least it would give you an idea of what is there.

On my coach, I can see where the framework is on a humid summer morning with the AC blasting inside... the condensation forms less at the frame members.

I wonder how well one of those electronic stud finders would pick it up.

Regardless, I'm doubtful that it has reinforcement specifically for this purpose, but you never know for sure.... even if it doesn't, I'd bet that with some thought about whatever the existing framework is, and/or adding a backer plate on the inside, I'd bet it's not that hard to do.

[Marine By Choice]

Here Is a picture the spare wheel mounted to the hitch receiver: Solid as a rock! Will send second picture as seperate message. For some reason only lets me attach 1

[Marine By Choice]

Second picture:

Sorry will need to rotate it!